Advertisement
 

Membership

 

Advertisement

 

Search

 
Forums \ WarCraft 3 Strategic forum \ Why no towers?
1, 2 
Information
6 months ago

carn
Why no towers? (1294 reads, 26 replies)
Ok, i normally play ud, so towers are standard, since they are cheap.
But still i do not understand, why i see so seldom towers with my enemies in 1 on1.

Because in 1on1 normally the inferior army tps, so no decisive victory can be acquired in the field. Decisive victory can often only be gained by destroying or defending expansion or main base.

So after you somehow fail to attack enemies main base or expansion, you can be rather certain, that you are on the defense for quite some time. So you can be quit certain, that any tower built at main base or expansion has a 50% chance to influence the next important battle.

In case you expand before attacking enemy, you can expect that he attacks soon, again same situation.

Now numbers, e.g. orcs:
Berserker 450 HP, medium armor 6, damage/sec 15, range 45
berserking 300 HP and damage 22.

watch tower 500 HP, heavy armor 3, damage/sec 28, range 80.

So even without tower upgrades 1 tower is nearly as good as 2 fully upgraded berserkers, so building 1 tower at base and 1 at expansion is nearly as good for defense as building 2 berserkers.

And if one doesn't have full upgrades on berserkers or some tower upgrades, 1 tower is better than 2 berserkers.

Of course Tauren can offer more punch than tower, but one can have only so much melee in base defense.

With other races its similar, 1 not upgraded tower semms to be nearly as good as 2 fully upgraded range and 2 towers are gold wise as expensive as 2 range, so why build range instead of towers at expansion and main base?

(this is not about mass towering, just building 2 at base and expansion instead of units, when you can expect an attack after enemy regrouped.)
Quote  
 

6 months ago
#1

mxprez.kebby

   2
DOnt understand what u mean. Ure english is bizzar in the beginning, so i didn't bother reading it all...
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#2

TheConqError

   4
it´s easy, army>towers ;) warcraft is rather offensive than defensive so that´s the way it is
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#3

carn

   1
2008-05-26 13:48:33, TheConqError wrote:
it´s easy, army>towers ;) warcraft is rather offensive than defensive so that´s the way it is


Why they are inferior even if you expect an attack against you're main base or expansion?

Yes, if the enemy already has 4 catapults, its obvious, but i was describing the case, that you had a battle with him, that somehow went wrong. In that case, you know how many cats there are and can decide.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#4

spirit.BW.TX

   4
sry but i dont get it...
maybe u write a pm in german and i translate it?^^
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#5

itsRaining-

   2
Lol dude.. dont forget that u can move ur units, u can micro them etc.

And if u lose ur army attacking the enemy, BUILD MORE UNITS and dont mass towers. That gives u a 100% lose if ur enemy isnt a total retard.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#6

carn

   1
I'll try again:

Player A and B both have expansions. A and B fight somewhere, with A suffering greater losses, so he tps.

A expects to lose game if he either loses main base or expansion, so A expects attack by B in the next minute, while Bs advantage from the won battle is still big.

There is enough resources and likely enough time to produce either some towers(not mass, just 2-4) or some units. Why should A produce units?
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#7

itsRaining-

   2
Cuz units > towers.. cuz units can move.. cuz units can attack if u manage to counter his attack.. cuz u can tp ur units.. cuz ur units can surro his hero.. CUZZ WAR3 ISNT A TD
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#8

Mighty_HeatoN

   2
If you spend your gold on towers rather then units, you can lose alot of mapcontrol. Resulting in huge hero-lvl-differences.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#9

carn

   1
2008-05-27 01:52:12, itsRaining- wrote:
Cuz units > towers.. cuz units can move.. cuz units can attack if u manage to counter his attack.. cuz u can tp ur units.. cuz ur units can surro his hero.. CUZZ WAR3 ISNT A TD

Therefore i'm talking about 2-4 towers, not more.
And in such situation you know, that you're enemy will come for you and will fight at you're base or expansion, so not moving doesn't matter much, defending expansion/base is important.

I'm asking this question, because often in the games i win, i think i win that way. I win some battle, take some time to heal and walk across the map, attack without siege damage and from my impression win, because enemy has 0 towers instead of 2, which would force me to withdraw.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#10

itsRaining-

   2
lets say, ur at ur base healing after u backed or tped out. u made the towers @ ur expo since u already have 1-2 at ur base. Enemy attacks ur expo, u tp there with alot less units than him since u made the towers. Then the enemy runs to ur base and ur stuck between ur base and expo w/o tp & units. ofc u can mass towers but that will just make u lose the game cuz enemy got map control + bigger army + there is no way u can destroy him w/o units.

And besides, as u are undead player. if u didnt have ziggz made in ur expo and u want 2-4 towers its gonna cost alot. if u have ziggz, its still gonna cost alot to make 4 towers.

Anddddd since ur undead player, ur units get imba reg bonus when ur fiting in ur expo/base so 1 slow tower to help nuking. When u make units, u can just abuse coil-nova-nuke to force enemy to tp out

for the 100000th time: UNITS > TOWERS

:]
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#11

JayGGx

   1
lol...build towers and hide in base??while your opponent masses expo and upgrade all attack and defences?creeps all his heroes to 5 and make siege units in the end??btw..level 5 panda>towers and lastly
2008-05-27 01:52:12, itsRaining- wrote:
CUZZ WAR3 ISNT A TD
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#12

ramenlover

   2
well you have to see it like this:

invest gold/wood in tower -> you have less recources left for training an army -> less army -> disadvantage on map, you cant take fights -> enemy will do mass expands -> mass siege -> gg

as an ud i do not really waste money on any type of towers, exept for the nerubian tower vs orc which is really necessary because of fiends coming to late for dealing with the BM.

in my oppinion only weaker players (exept for humans :D) use towers to defend their base from getting crushed.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#13

carn

   1
Since i'm a noob, i'm not ashamed to ask stupid questions:

"Enemy attacks ur expo, u tp there with alot less units than him since u made the towers. Then the enemy runs to ur base and ur stuck between ur base and expo w/o tp & units."

Enemy attack ur expo, u tp there with slightly less units(remeber lost battle, he will also continue to build units). Either you run again and lose you're expo.
Or he runs toward you're base without towers, can position himself nicely between the buildings and destroy a few, while you figure out how to attack.

I cannot see while second or third alternative are superior to first, can you explain?

"And besides, as u are undead player. if u didnt have ziggz made in ur expo and u want 2-4 towers its gonna cost alot."
Building ziggs just to have towers is certainly to expensive. And i was talking mostly about my enemies in such situation, who do not want to build towers.

"ur units get imba reg bonus"
Why is the reg bonus "imba"?

"When u make units, u can just abuse coil-nova-nuke to force enemy to tp out."
Why should he mind losing his hero, if he can kill you're expo and kill off most of you're army?

"well you have to see it like this:

invest gold/wood in tower -> you have less recources left for training an army -> less army -> disadvantage on map, you cant take fights -> enemy will do mass expands -> mass siege -> gg"

And i think its like this:
lose battle-> have less units than enemy -> both build further units -> still less units than enemy -> enemy destroys expansion -> gg
lose battle -> have less units than enemy -> enemy build units you build towers -> expansion can be saved -> enemy needs to wait for siege -> you have time to do something about bad situation

"as an ud i do not really waste money on any type of towers, exept for the nerubian tower vs orc which is really necessary because of fiends coming to late for dealing with the BM."

What the hell do you do, if the enemy walks into you're base and kills you're acolytes?
It takes less than 5 seconds to do and without towers he will not lose anything doing so and you will lose a lot of gold.
What do you do, if he splits his army in 2 and does this both at you're expansion and you're base, running at the place you tp in?

"in my oppinion only weaker players (exept for humans :D) use towers to defend their base from getting crushed."

Normally if you lose a battle in a serious way(the situation i am talking about here, losing several units not just exchanging some shots.) you were at least for a short period of time the weaker player, otherwise you wouldn't have fought the battle in the first place.
Why is it a stupid idea of weaker players to use tower to keep their bases from overrun?
As they are weaker they would not fare well by engaging with the weaker army in battles where there inferior micro would hurt seriously.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#14

carn

   1
2008-05-27 13:43:48, JayGGX wrote:
lol...build towers and hide in base??while your opponent masses expo and upgrade all attack and defences?creeps all his heroes to 5 and make siege units in the end??btw..level 5 panda>towers and lastly
2008-05-27 01:52:12, itsRaining- wrote:
CUZZ WAR3 ISNT A TD



I didn't talk about hiding for a long time. Just about building towers to fend off an expected attack and gain time to do something to turn things in you're favor.

And building towers doesn't keep you from creeping(if the map is large) or attacking his expo(if the map is small).
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#15

NeedsMoreKodoBeast

   1
If you want to build towers, try Human ^_^;
In Warcraft III, towers are primarily used to prevent harass, or if you're Orc, prevent getting imbatowered. The maximum amount of towers a player usually has is 1, and thats only if they find it completely necessary. Human being an exception because they're imbalanced.

Pros don't build towers because towers cost resources that you could be using for your army. Battles ARE won outside of the base (watch some replays,) most games end when a hero or two falls or an army gets decimated. You say it doesn't matter when a losing army tps, but there are losses. Obviously they may lose a few units before they tp'd because their assessment was late. Also town portals are costly to replace (350 gold.) The winning army gains an Experience and Resource advantage because the enemy tp'd.

If an enemy keeps having to TP out, the winner/loser margin only grows larger. When they are at their base they are not creeping, gaining experience, items, etc.

Ask me more if you want me to elaborate..

Also your math is failure.. if you watch any game you can see how Towers go down in seconds. (Excluding imba hu towers.)
And you say that with only a Nerubian tower an enemy walks right into your base and kills all your acolytes? That is downright wrong, it means you need to build your base better (tighter.)
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#16

carn

   1
2008-05-28 10:28:21, NeedsMoreKodoBeast wrote:
If you want to build towers, try Human ^_^;
In Warcraft III, towers are primarily used to prevent harass,

And why not 2 towers at expo and base to just do that?

Since i"m lousy harrasser my enemies do not suffer from not building towers, but how do they know from the start?
2008-05-28 10:28:21, NeedsMoreKodoBeast wrote:
Pros don't build towers because towers cost resources that you could be using for your army. Battles ARE won outside of the base (watch some replays,) most games end when a hero or two falls or an army gets decimated. You say it doesn't matter when a losing army tps, but there are losses. Obviously they may lose a few units before they tp'd because their assessment was late. Also town portals are costly to replace (350 gold.) The winning army gains an Experience and Resource advantage because the enemy tp'd.

I say it matters far less than losing the expo. If you lose a battle you lose maybe 500-1500 more in gold than you're enemy. If you somehow have time you can rebuild you're army and go again.
So losing battle does not mean that game is lost.
If you lose an expansion, without the enemy suffering from doing so after you have lost a battle for 1000 gp, you lose 700 gold for buildings and peons and 7-10 per second and you're enemy just have to watch expansion sites to win and keep his own up.
So losing expansion after you already lost a battle means game is lost. So one has to win at the expansion.
2008-05-28 10:28:21, NeedsMoreKodoBeast wrote:
Also your math is failure.. if you watch any game you can see how Towers go down in seconds. (Excluding imba hu towers.)

And therefore my math argues that its better to have towers than units in such a fight, because towers have more hp and firepower for same gold(not for same wood, but its obvious that one builds what one has resources for).
2008-05-28 10:28:21, NeedsMoreKodoBeast wrote:
And you say that with only a Nerubian tower an enemy walks right into your base and kills all your acolytes? That is downright wrong, it means you need to build your base better (tighter.)


Do not know, i often do this with other UD players.
My own base is not built very well, but normally(and probably for this reason) i upgrade my ziggs, so anybody is welcome to walk into the base.
I only have the experience, that with only nerub that stupid BM comes again and again causing me lot of work, which i lose in creeping. With a spirit or 2 added they never return.
Maybe i should have named this thread "noobs battle - why no towers?".

And i know no way to design expos so that enemy cannot just walk by and kill the acos.
And same can be true for orc and human expos.(NE of course has less reason to guard expo and has the most expensive towers, so towers less useful for them)
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#17

ramenlover

   2
2008-05-28 10:00:01, carn wrote:
"as an ud i do not really waste money on any type of towers, exept for the nerubian tower vs orc which is really necessary because of fiends coming to late for dealing with the BM."


I really start doubting that you are willing to understand me. if you notice the bm killing your aco's, hit "space" to center the screen to the last action appearing in the game. while you did this, the ice tower will slow down the bm. then you move the acolyte between your buildings and attack him with your wood ghuls. if you micro propely the bm wont be able to do shit. experienced players dont even try to get the BM in the ud's base when they see the nerubian tower.

the fact of splitting your army in 2 separate parts will somehow never happen. wc3 is not sc, the army is just to small to get anything destroyed. of course you can split it up at any time, but the problem is that you will have also to split up your heroes and have to buy 2tp's on every hero.

just take the DK and the lich for example in the MU vs orc. ud army without DK = no speed + no heal. the units will be ensared one after another.

ud army without lich = no nova + no frost armor = no hero focus.

this is just an example, it would be the same if you would split up the AM with the MK or the MK with the pala or the BM with the SH or the FS with the TC etc.

just focus on laddering and practice a lot and in about ~200 games you will see the difference.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#18

carn

   1
2008-05-28 11:50:19, ramenlover wrote:
2008-05-28 10:00:01, carn wrote:
"as an ud i do not really waste money on any type of towers, exept for the nerubian tower vs orc which is really necessary because of fiends coming to late for dealing with the BM."


I really start doubting that you are willing to understand me. if you notice the bm killing your aco's, hit "space" to center the screen to the last action appearing in the game. while you did this, the ice tower will slow down the bm. then you move the acolyte between your buildings and attack him with your wood ghuls. if you micro propely the bm wont be able to do shit. experienced players dont even try to get the BM in the ud's base when they see the nerubian tower.

Of course thats what i do.
But having my aco and my ghouls run around does mean that they are not harvesting. I would have to analyze it, but its possible, that every time the BM walks around i lose maybe 40 gold and 80 lumber. Also i need to do something.
So if i already have and nerub tower and see that the BM still comes, why shouldn't i upgrade another tower?

And from the replays i watched, even if he kills an aco, he also has costs in lost time, hp and mana and that costs are increased by a second tower, so why shouldn't i, if he seems to come again and again?
With 1 nerub and 2 spirits i can nearly ignore the BM his loses are nearly as large as mine and i can continue to creep or attack him without wasting much attention.

And this is even more true with my expansion, should i tp every time the BM shows up?
Then he just turns invisible again and happily notes that he used 140 mana and i 350 gold. Soon he will return.
2008-05-28 11:50:19, ramenlover wrote:
the fact of splitting your army in 2 separate parts will somehow never happen. wc3 is not sc, the army is just to small to get anything destroyed. of course you can split it up at any time, but the problem is that you will have also to split up your heroes and have to buy 2tp's on every hero.

One does not need too fully split the army, just enough to damage the expansion. E.g. orc could use his main force to attack you're main base and send 3 raiders at expansion. You have to tp in to save you're town. He tps out, when he sees you tp in, so you cannot kill any of his units. Both lost a tp, you're main got some building damage and his units have some hp damage, fair deal.
But then you have to go to the expansion or use another tp - in either case you lost more than he and if you do not built towers he'll do it again.
Other races might have other options to do such an army split, without risking too much.
(i do not do this, because i build wrong armies for this and micro too bad.)
2008-05-28 11:50:19, ramenlover wrote:
just take the DK and the lich for example in the MU vs orc. ud army without DK = no speed + no heal. the units will be ensared one after another.

ud army without lich = no nova + no frost armor = no hero focus.

And the point was tping where the enemy tps in and continue fighting at the other place.
SO whats the problem(for a competent player = not me) DK going at main base, fleeing with high speed when tp shows up. And lich killing the workers with nova tping if he has to go?
2008-05-28 11:50:19, ramenlover wrote:
this is just an example, it would be the same if you would split up the AM with the MK or the MK with the pala or the BM with the SH or the FS with the TC etc.

just focus on laddering and practice a lot and in about ~200 games you will see the difference.


So with 400?
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#19

carn

   1
Ok, forget it, i see this game more as a resource matchup and the one whos resources last longer wins.
Approach of most others seems to be, that game is about getting XPs for the hero by killing enemy units.
Top of the page   Quote  

6 months ago
#20

fenix.sein

   2
If you only protect or base with towers u let enemy control the map, he gets much gold from creeps too. And when he has the advantage and better heroes he can just keep u stable and bank in 50 limit and do superiour army with his much bigger heroes.
Top of the page   Quote  

1, 2 

Forum post
  • Do to others what you would have them do to you.
  • Do not judge so that you will not be judged.
    » Read posting rules in detail

    Reminder: IP-addresses for each comment is saved. Offensive posts will be censored. Repeated offense will result in a warning and/or a temporal lockdown of the account.
    • Why no towers? \ Reply
    To submit a post, you have to be a registred member. Register an account below the title 'Membership' in the left menu.

    » Top of the page